In a game-changing paper published in the online version of Nature Climate Change, Esper et al.
(8 July 2012) provide j45iconvincing evidence that both the Medieval and
Roman Warm Periods of 1000 and 2000 years ago, respectively, were warmer
than the Current Warm Period has been to date, in spite of the fact
that today's atmospheric CO2 concentration is some 40% greater than it was during those two earlier periods.
In setting the stage for their paradigm-altering work, the twelve
researchers - hailing from Finland, Germany, Scotland and Switzerland -
write that "solar insolation changes, resulting from long-term
oscillations of orbital configurations (Milankovitch, 1941), are an
important driver of Holocene climate," referencing the studies of
Mayewski et al. (2004) and Wanner et al. (2008). In
addition, they state that this forcing has been "substantial over the
past 2000 years, up to four times as large as the 1.6 W/m2
net anthropogenic forcing since 1750," as suggested by the work of
Berger and Loutre (1991). And on the basis of "numerous high-latitude
proxy records," as they describe it, they note that "slow orbital
changes have recently been shown to gradually force boreal summer
temperature cooling over the common era," citing Kaufman et al. (2009).

And so it is that the question for our day ought to be: Why was much of the CO2-starved world of Medieval and Roman times decidedly warmer
(by about 0.3 and 0.5°C, respectively) than it was during the peak
warmth of the 20th century? Clearly, the greenhouse effect of
atmospheric CO2 - if it has not been grossly over-estimated - must currently be being significantly tempered by some unappreciated CO2-
and/or warming-induced negative-feedback phenomenon (possibly of
biological origin) to the degree that the basic greenhouse effect of
earth's rising atmospheric CO2 concentration
cannot fully compensate for the decrease in solar insolation experienced
over the past two millennia as a result of the "long-term oscillations
of orbital configurations" cited by Esper et al. (2012).

Popular Posts

This alarmist propaganda goes against the real data. Penn State Professor Michael Mann has made similar claims of modern temperatures being the warmest, but such “Hockey Stick” temperature claims have been demolished in the scientific literature.

Opinion by Anthony Cox
I wrote before about the ABC’s bias and the real
cost of the ABC to the Australian community. Since then the Abbott
government has announced reasonable budget cuts but the ABC has sunk further
into its betrayal of its Charter and of the Australian community.
In a recent poll about the farcical China/US deal about
emissions the ABC’s The Drum initially showed this result: 12/11/2014: China and the US have struck a new deal to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Do you think Australia will need to adjust its climate change policies as a result? No 55% Yes 44% Unsure 1%

15205 votes counted
Given the ABC’s Left/Green readership a remarkable result.
However shortly the result
was changed to this: 12/11/2014: China and the US have struck a new deal to limit greenhouse gas
emissions. Do you think Australia will need to adjust its climate change
policies as a result?Yes 76% No 23% Unsure 1% 6001
votes counted
How could you trust an organisation which lies like that and
distorts public …